not another skyrim...

Well skyrim was good until you got daedra weapons and armor and Borderlands 2 got bored of it after beating main story and true vault hunter mode is annoying. Oh yeah, is Coma being serious or being funny, hard to tell.

_________________humans might live on.... for now. Who cares about YOUR FEELINGS? WELL I DO in a way.

Also I'm going to get into Soul Sacrifice (for Vita, which is the best handheld on the market, in my humble opinion) when it comes out. It'll probably tide me over until Elder Scrolls 6 and Fallout 4 come out. They will probably be the best games of whatever years they come out in, regardless of Dark Souls 2's release date.

hageshisa wrote:Also, Skyrim was released in 2011 not 2012 so it couldn't have been best game of 2012, tihi!

Ok, so it was the best game of the last 2 years then. Happy?

_________________Skyrim is my favorite game. It is easily at least 10 times better than Dark Souls.

“There is real beauty in Dark Souls. It reveals that life is more suffering than pleasure, more failure than success, and that even the momentary relief of achievement is wiped away by new levels of difficulty. It is also a testament to our persistence in the face of that suffering. “

Am I the only one who prefers the Fallout franchise to the Elder Scrolls? I like Bethesda it's just that the melee and magic feels a little too clunky especially compared with Dark Souls. When they use the engine with guns and VATS however, it is amazing!

Anyways I do not fear that they will try to win over the Skyrim fanbase. They have their own dedicated fans to please, and if anything they will simply push there marketing campaign and maybe adjust the learning curve slightly. If they really feel like taking a risk they can adjust the way the plot is told. I have faith in From and I believe DkS II will be amazing :heart:

“There is real beauty in Dark Souls. It reveals that life is more suffering than pleasure, more failure than success, and that even the momentary relief of achievement is wiped away by new levels of difficulty. It is also a testament to our persistence in the face of that suffering. “

Is it elitist to offer that both games might have been developed with a certain 'type' of gamer in mind? At the developers own words, Skyrim was crafted with the care required in order to create a game world where decision making built the foundation for a true Role Playing experience. The problem of 'becoming' your character was resolved with abstract possibilities never before available to gamer's, like the ability to frolic through a living forest catching butterflies, or swimming up stream catching salmon to ensure a hearty dinner. Myriad options in addition to the elaborate race system and epic amounts of lore in the form of extensive literature strewn throughout the game were paramount in the creation of an actual world where the goal wasn't solely to fight, but more to live, and to live in your own unique way.

I think this is the fear for a lot of Dks fans. Dark Souls was not at all a game like Skyrim. There's truly not much 'living' to be had, only surviving and struggling to survive and struggling to struggle.

The problem is that a game world like Skyrim, while amazing by any rational measure, by its own ambition does sacrifice the primary ingredients that make a game like Dark Souls so engrossing for die hard fans. At least with current technologies, developers haven't managed to create a world as open as skyrim that still adheres as stridently as dark souls does to a truly refined and masterful combat system.

And I do agree with previous posters that upon investigation, it becomes clear that the developers never meant that they were looking to make the next installment of Dark Souls more like Skyrim in regards to gameplay.

Keep in mind that any news released so far about Dks2 has been translated from non native-english speakers. Not only does much likely get lost in the translations, but journalists in general have the primary goal of selling their media, even if that means stirring up controversies by using buzz words in their articles' titles, eg "Dark Souls 2 to be More Accessible!".

Have faith in From, after all, count the hours of your life you've spent absolutely entranced in worlds created by their own hands. They can, and they will do it again.

No worries, Dark Souls 2 will be every bit as wonderful, even more so, than we are all imagining every night.

Praise The Sun!

_________________We can recover the lost connection, the one monotheism severed between Athens and Jerusalem. We could get back a world where philosophy was valued, where the beauty of science was considered worth studying, worth revering even, where literature would be the key to the study of ethics an morality. And if you wanted the transcendent, you'd have love and sex and music.

emraluces wrote:Is it elitist to offer that both games might have been developed with a certain 'type' of gamer in mind? At the developers own words, Skyrim was crafted with the care required in order to create a game world where decision making built the foundation for a true Role Playing experience. The problem of 'becoming' your character was resolved with abstract possibilities never before available to gamer's, like the ability to frolic through a living forest catching butterflies, or swimming up stream catching salmon to ensure a hearty dinner. Myriad options in addition to the elaborate race system and epic amounts of lore in the form of extensive literature strewn throughout the game were paramount in the creation of an actual world where the goal wasn't solely to fight, but more to live, and to live in your own unique way.

I think this is the fear for a lot of Dks fans. Dark Souls was not at all a game like Skyrim. There's truly not much 'living' to be had, only surviving and struggling to survive and struggling to struggle.

The problem is that a game world like Skyrim, while amazing by any rational measure, by its own ambition does sacrifice the primary ingredients that make a game like Dark Souls so engrossing for die hard fans. At least with current technologies, developers haven't managed to create a world as open as skyrim that still adheres as stridently as dark souls does to a truly refined and masterful combat system.

And I do agree with previous posters that upon investigation, it becomes clear that the developers never meant that they were looking to make the next installment of Dark Souls more like Skyrim in regards to gameplay.

Keep in mind that any news released so far about Dks2 has been translated from non native-english speakers. Not only does much likely get lost in the translations, but journalists in general have the primary goal of selling their media, even if that means stirring up controversies by using buzz words in their articles' titles, eg "Dark Souls 2 to be More Accessible!".

Have faith in From, after all, count the hours of your life you've spent absolutely entranced in worlds created by their own hands. They can, and they will do it again.

No worries, Dark Souls 2 will be every bit as wonderful, even more so, than we are all imagining every night.

Praise The Sun!

Indeed, by all means I enjoyed Skyrim and all the others Elder Scrools games, I merely like making fun of them every so often, as with most other games, but we must admit,Skyrim, while having flaws, had an amazing open world enviroment, filled with creativity.

Im not so worried about Dark Souls 2...not directly... Its just that this current generation is corruptive....in order to sell more copies, companies must streamline and dumb down their games... Im afraid that From may become victim of it one day.

In my opinion I found Skyrim boring. I would rather play Animal Crossing for three days straight then play that game ever again. It was just...damn..Dark Souls was great, it challenged you right away, and if you didnt learn from your mistakes then well, death always did become your best friend.

This is my opinion, sure others won't agree with it but oh well.

_________________Always looking for some duels! Message me on Either console. (Preferably Xbox since I just got Dark Souls for PS3)

Xbox Live Gt: A Daunted WolfPSN ID: The_DoritoNinja

"He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster. And when you gaze long into an abyss the abyss also gazes into you."

Sir_Dorito wrote:In my opinion I found Skyrim boring. I would rather play Animal Crossing for three days straight then play that game ever again. It was just...damn..Dark Souls was great, it challenged you right away, and if you didnt learn from your mistakes then well, death always did become your best friend.

This is my opinion, sure others won't agree with it but oh well.

What's wrong with Animal Crossing?....Hey c'mon that's the ideal life right there! You catch fish, bugs, and dig up fossils to not only help preserve the culture of your town but to also pay off your DEBT. Your freaking debt man! Your landlord essentially tells you to live it up and pay it when you feel like it.

In response to emraluces, I do not see it as elitist it's more catering than anything. If this were a stand alone or first time game than obviously the developers would want to make the game as open to all fans as possible. This, however, is not the case with DkS II. The developers are obviously going to ensure that the most cherished elements of the game will be preserved for the sequel. How do they find out what these elements are? They look for what their fans liked most about the game. It does not makes sense to think that they would ask a COD fan, (not being biased it was just the first example that came to mind) who's never played the game, what he thinks the next DkS game should have. Certain games attract certain gamers, and as these fanbases grow the developers stop listening to what the gaming industry as a whole wants, and listens to what this group of fans wants, at least in moderation. It's not elitist but just a logical way of thinking, and business for that matter, that developers should create games (emphasis on sequels) with a "certain 'type'" of gamer in mind.

I think that makes a world of sense, andres. You wouldn't risk alienating those people who are already interested in your product in the hopes of attracting another customer base which may not even be interested in your product anyway even if you attempt to cater to them.

You want to build on your foundation/base, not brush it aside in order to try and replace it with some pie-in-the-sky craziness.

Skyrim is very much a different beast to be honest. I also don't like it much, but it has its perks. Insane exploration, little details like chopping wood, getting married, cooking.. There's more to it than just fetch quests.

It has been made more action oriented, skills streamlined much as they can be. However I disagree all the quests suck. The imperial/resistance war and the dark brotherhood quests are great. They *** up a lot, but there's still a good few questlines that give quality gameplay for at least 20-30 hours, to be honest there's enough to keep most people interested for a good while, but definitely not the quoted 100-200 hours I see in some places

I digress however, there are ways to make souls more accessible without wrecking it, better explanations, an early game that focus on developing fighting skills and learning the basics, but without informing you that's what the game is doing. Can be done with well selected enemy types, level composition, loot in early levels introducing us to weapons of many basic types, however I'd hesitate to make magic introduced too early on.

I think making souls more accessible is possible, but in terms of gameplay it must be subtle, while perhaps explaining more where to go/ the story more thoroughly, though I'd rather avoid a changes like that.